Yeah this sounds like it's totally in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution. I swear Lewk it's almost as if you're turning into an alt-right caricature of a liberal.

We have freedom of speech, you can say 9/11 was right and proper and jihad is cool. But if you do, you should have a closer look taken at you. Would you agree? Because again, an investigation is not a government sanction. If you are jailed, fined etc that is government sanction.

It was appropriate to remove him from the investigation in order to avoid problems with the appearance of bias that may be highlighted by people who don't respect freedom of speech or the professionalism in organizations such as the FBI. It was inappropriate to throw him to the wolves before the matter was properly dealt with in an internal investigation, because his privately discussed opinions are perfectly legal.

Not long ago, the FBI was described as "Trumpland" by an agent, and multiple internal sources described a deep-seated bias, within the agency, against Clinton. By your reasoning, this bias should cast doubt on any investigation into Clinton's actions that may lead to an indictment. Is that what you're trying to argue?

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

We have freedom of speech, you can say 9/11 was right and proper and jihad is cool. But if you do, you should have a closer look taken at you. Would you agree? Because again, an investigation is not a government sanction. If you are jailed, fined etc that is government sanction.

Would you like to be investigated for endorsing rape, physical abuse/torture and murder? Because--like terrorism and violent jihad--those, too, are illegal things. Thinking that Trump is a fucking idiot, however, is not.

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

Investigation != government sanction. Police action or congressional action to investigate does not require evidence of wrong doing.

Actually yes, they both do. Typically, the direct evidence of wrong-doing is that an already committed wrong has already been uncovered. The police investigating a crime that has been committed, a congressional investigation looking into, say, confirmed attempts by a foreign power to manipulate a US election. You need a predicated act of wrong-doing to base an investigation on. You can't know where an investigation might lead, what other acts might be uncovered in the course of it and also pursued, but you need that first wrong-doing to start.

Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

Which is to say, Lewk believes that privately criticizing Trump is a crime.

Originally Posted by RandBlade

A crime serious enough to warrant the fifth.

Lewk is not alone in this. Conservatives are starting to imply that what Strzok did may be grounds for firing him. Conservatives with large audiences are calling for the FBI to be "cleansed", in response to this story. Lewk may have his bizarre fetishes, but on this matter he's not an outlier. At best, these people are suggesting that Strzok should be sanctioned in various ways for tainting, with his mere involvement, a potential criminal investigation of great importance to national security. Trump's core voters are buying it.

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

I presume the idea is that it's somehow criminal to influence a federal investigation due to personal bias.

Meanwhile, Lewk-endorsed state media is giving credence to the idea that Mueller obtaining transition-team emails from a govt. third party is illegal and possibly a sign of a coup being underway. A coup.

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

So the investigation in to Donald Trump’s campaign has been crooked from the jump. But the scary part is we may now have proof the investigation was weaponized to destroy his presidency for partisan political purposes. And to disenfranchise millions of American voters. Now, if that’s true, we have a coup on our hands in America. And Congress must force the FBI and the individuals involved to come clean on what counter-espionage agents meant by, “insurance policy” to “protect the country” from Donald Trump’s presidency.

The other links suggests that Fox and a growing number of GOP politicians are aligned on this matter.

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

Actually yes, they both do. Typically, the direct evidence of wrong-doing is that an already committed wrong has already been uncovered. The police investigating a crime that has been committed, a congressional investigation looking into, say, confirmed attempts by a foreign power to manipulate a US election. You need a predicated act of wrong-doing to base an investigation on. You can't know where an investigation might lead, what other acts might be uncovered in the course of it and also pursued, but you need that first wrong-doing to start.

No you don't. Show me where it says Congress can't pull up whoever the hell they want in front of committee.

No you don't. Show me where it says Congress can't pull up whoever the hell they want in front of committee.

You're getting confused, Lewk. You talked about a Congressional investigation and I replied on the same topic. Now you're talking about any committee meeting of any kind whatsoever. That's not the same topic. You show me where Congress has launched an investigation despite lacking any predicating wrong to prompt such an investigation in the first place.

Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

Can't decide of Republicans are genuinely that stupid or just think everyone else is.

Fucking "secret society".

Last edited by Steely Glint; 01-25-2018 at 07:02 PM.

We should die for the things we believe in, but live our lives in the dark self-deceiving.
In the snow, all the world that we knew is ice and so we are cold, dead and gone.
Shine a light till the dark sky is burning, wolves are howling and fortune is turning.
But our hearts and the words that we say are ice, and so we are cold, dead and gone.

Lewk, he there's nothing in those texts that differs from what Senator Graham himself, or other Republican senators, have said.

Or what Lewk himself said in the Trump 2016 thread before Trump won the nomination. Apparently, Lewkowski himself is a hopelessly partisan Democrat.

We should die for the things we believe in, but live our lives in the dark self-deceiving.
In the snow, all the world that we knew is ice and so we are cold, dead and gone.
Shine a light till the dark sky is burning, wolves are howling and fortune is turning.
But our hearts and the words that we say are ice, and so we are cold, dead and gone.